Fight Club - Football TV Ratings (AFL vs NRL)

Which is the best football code? Here you can have it out with other football fans.
User avatar
Xman
Coach
Coach
Reactions:
Posts: 13919
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 7:09 pm
Team: Essendon
Location:

Re: Fight Club - Football TV Ratings Thread

Post by Xman »

pussycat wrote:
Get used to running second Xman you'll be ding quiet a bit of it over the next few years.
How, we won this year, even with a cummulative count that ignores our 50% longer running time and overlapping broadcasts.

=D> =D> =D>
King-Eliagh: ...I believe [RL] is popular in all the other states and territories, bar tasmania.
User avatar
Raiderdave
Coach
Coach
Reactions:
Posts: 16683
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 1:10 pm
Team: Canberra
Location:

Re: Fight Club - Football TV Ratings Thread

Post by Raiderdave »

Xman wrote:
pussycat wrote:
Get used to running second Xman you'll be ding quiet a bit of it over the next few years.
even with a cummulative count that ignores our 50% longer running time
=D> =D> =D>
you mean the thing you said would ensure more $$$ for the VFL always ?
:-k
how'd that pan out d head :lol: :lol: :lol:
RL SOO II 4.194 Million veiwers
RL SOO I 4.068 Million
NRL GF 3.968 Million
VFL Grand Final 3.620 Million
SOO III 3.364 Million
NRL Prelim 2.219 Million
Kangaroos V NZ 1.214 Million

Sookerwhos V Japan 238K :lol:
User avatar
Xman
Coach
Coach
Reactions:
Posts: 13919
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 7:09 pm
Team: Essendon
Location:

Re: Fight Club - Football TV Ratings Thread

Post by Xman »

Raiderdave wrote:
Xman wrote:
pussycat wrote:
Get used to running second Xman you'll be ding quiet a bit of it over the next few years.
even with a cummulative count that ignores our 50% longer running time
=D> =D> =D>
you mean the thing you said would ensure more $$$ for the VFL always ?
:-k
how'd that pan out d head :lol: :lol: :lol:
about as well as your cries of "regionals" and "our markets are worth so much more"..... :lol:
King-Eliagh: ...I believe [RL] is popular in all the other states and territories, bar tasmania.
User avatar
Raiderdave
Coach
Coach
Reactions:
Posts: 16683
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 1:10 pm
Team: Canberra
Location:

Re: Fight Club - Football TV Ratings Thread

Post by Raiderdave »

Xman wrote:
Raiderdave wrote:
Xman wrote:
even with a cummulative count that ignores our 50% longer running time
=D> =D> =D>
you mean the thing you said would ensure more $$$ for the VFL always ?
:-k
how'd that pan out d head :lol: :lol: :lol:
about as well as your cries of "regionals" and "our markets are worth so much more"..... :lol:

ah no
you lot boasted ............. Oh oh oh .... we always win the metro ratings
we said .... we make up for this .. & ... surpass the VFL's ratings ... when our regionals are factored in
you lot said ..... oh , well .. the regionals don't matter cos they aren't counted properly
we said.... well , we'll see when the money is dished out
you lot said .... well even if they do put you ahead for ratings ... our games go for longer ... advertisers will pay more to broadcasters .. as they can show more adds in a VFL broadcast
we said ...well , we'll see when the money is dished out


ahhhhhhhh
who was right ? :cool:
RL SOO II 4.194 Million veiwers
RL SOO I 4.068 Million
NRL GF 3.968 Million
VFL Grand Final 3.620 Million
SOO III 3.364 Million
NRL Prelim 2.219 Million
Kangaroos V NZ 1.214 Million

Sookerwhos V Japan 238K :lol:
User avatar
QueenslandISAFL
Captain
Captain
Reactions:
Posts: 584
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:43 pm
Team: Brisbane Lions
Location: AFL Heartland (Brisbane)

Re: Fight Club - Football TV Ratings Thread

Post by QueenslandISAFL »

Clean straight win for the AFL =D> =D> =D>
NRL Fans = Basement Dwelling Virgins
User avatar
Xman
Coach
Coach
Reactions:
Posts: 13919
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 7:09 pm
Team: Essendon
Location:

Re: Fight Club - Football TV Ratings Thread

Post by Xman »

Raiderdave wrote:
Xman wrote:
Raiderdave wrote:
you mean the thing you said would ensure more $$$ for the VFL always ?
:-k
how'd that pan out d head :lol: :lol: :lol:
about as well as your cries of "regionals" and "our markets are worth so much more"..... :lol:

ah no
you lot boasted ............. Oh oh oh .... we always win the metro ratings
we said .... we make up for this .. & ... surpass the VFL's ratings ... when our regionals are factored in
you lot said ..... oh , well .. the regionals don't matter cos they aren't counted properly
we said.... well , we'll see when the money is dished out
you lot said .... well even if they do put you ahead for ratings ... our games go for longer ... advertisers will pay more to broadcasters .. as they can show more adds in a VFL broadcast
we said ...well , we'll see when the money is dished out


ahhhhhhhh
who was right ? :cool:
we were. We got more! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
King-Eliagh: ...I believe [RL] is popular in all the other states and territories, bar tasmania.
pussycat
Coach
Coach
Reactions:
Posts: 6620
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 10:50 pm
Team: The Shanghai Sharks
Location: far away

Re: Fight Club - Football TV Ratings Thread

Post by pussycat »

Xman wrote:
pussycat wrote:
Get used to running second Xman you'll be ding quiet a bit of it over the next few years.
How, we won this year, even with a cummulative count that ignores our 50% longer running time and overlapping broadcasts.

=D> =D> =D>
Cant you see xman that by making a statement like that your admitting you have a boring, long winded game that cant compete with the NRL unless it is given special treatment :lol:

That survey, regardless of what you read into it, pits the figures for the average pre match/match/post match against your match average alone. not only that, it doesn't give any consideration to the home fans base of our 16th side.


So if you want to see this as some kind of victory, no matter how patheticly shallow the survey might be. It shows just how desperate you and your cronies must be. :roll:

On top of all that AFL has more games on FTA and almost twice the games on PTV. How pathetic are they?
Rugby League, the dominant force in Australian sport! :cheers:

"I do like annoying the Victorians; they are so easy to get, At times I've looked at them and had a giggle." Peter V'Landys
User avatar
Xman
Coach
Coach
Reactions:
Posts: 13919
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 7:09 pm
Team: Essendon
Location:

Re: Fight Club - Football TV Ratings Thread

Post by Xman »

pussycat wrote:
Xman wrote:
pussycat wrote:
Get used to running second Xman you'll be ding quiet a bit of it over the next few years.
How, we won this year, even with a cummulative count that ignores our 50% longer running time and overlapping broadcasts.

=D> =D> =D>
Cant you see xman that by making a statement like that your admitting you have a boring, long winded game that cant compete with the NRL unless it is given special treatment :lol:

That survey, regardless of what you read into it, pits the figures for the average pre match/match/post match against your match average alone. not only that, it doesn't give any consideration to the home fans base of our 16th side.


So if you want to see this as some kind of victory, no matter how patheticly shallow the survey might be. It shows just how desperate you and your cronies must be. :roll:

On top of all that AFL has more games on FTA and almost twice the games on PTV. How pathetic are they?
Every program has a peak audience and an average lower than this. EVERY program. A shorter program will always have a higher average because the averaging result will be closer to the peak audience. Why do you think networks have begun coding the programs? For fun? :roll:

The NRL have had this "false" averaging advantage for years. Now the AFL game is coded by CH 7 (not the AFL :lol: ) the programs are more comparable. However the NRLs telecast is still shorter than the AFLs game section meaning they are still falsly advantaged :wink:
King-Eliagh: ...I believe [RL] is popular in all the other states and territories, bar tasmania.
User avatar
Raiderdave
Coach
Coach
Reactions:
Posts: 16683
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 1:10 pm
Team: Canberra
Location:

Re: Fight Club - Football TV Ratings Thread

Post by Raiderdave »

Xman wrote:
Raiderdave wrote:
Xman wrote:
about as well as your cries of "regionals" and "our markets are worth so much more"..... :lol:

ah no
you lot boasted ............. Oh oh oh .... we always win the metro ratings
we said .... we make up for this .. & ... surpass the VFL's ratings ... when our regionals are factored in
you lot said ..... oh , well .. the regionals don't matter cos they aren't counted properly
we said.... well , we'll see when the money is dished out
you lot said .... well even if they do put you ahead for ratings ... our games go for longer ... advertisers will pay more to broadcasters .. as they can show more adds in a VFL broadcast
we said ...well , we'll see when the money is dished out


ahhhhhhhh
who was right ? :cool:
we were. We got more! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
really .... when did the NRL announce its deal had been finalised ? :-k

oh thats right .. they haven't :wink:
whats that I can smell

fear ? :cool:
RL SOO II 4.194 Million veiwers
RL SOO I 4.068 Million
NRL GF 3.968 Million
VFL Grand Final 3.620 Million
SOO III 3.364 Million
NRL Prelim 2.219 Million
Kangaroos V NZ 1.214 Million

Sookerwhos V Japan 238K :lol:
User avatar
Raiderdave
Coach
Coach
Reactions:
Posts: 16683
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 1:10 pm
Team: Canberra
Location:

Re: Fight Club - Football TV Ratings Thread

Post by Raiderdave »

Xman wrote:
pussycat wrote:
Xman wrote:
How, we won this year, even with a cummulative count that ignores our 50% longer running time and overlapping broadcasts.

=D> =D> =D>
Cant you see xman that by making a statement like that your admitting you have a boring, long winded game that cant compete with the NRL unless it is given special treatment :lol:

That survey, regardless of what you read into it, pits the figures for the average pre match/match/post match against your match average alone. not only that, it doesn't give any consideration to the home fans base of our 16th side.


So if you want to see this as some kind of victory, no matter how patheticly shallow the survey might be. It shows just how desperate you and your cronies must be. :roll:

On top of all that AFL has more games on FTA and almost twice the games on PTV. How pathetic are they?
Every program has a peak audience and an average lower than this. EVERY program. A shorter program will always have a higher average because the averaging result will be closer to the peak audience. Why do you think networks have begun coding the programs? For fun? :roll:

The NRL have had this "false" averaging advantage for years. Now the AFL game is coded by CH 7 (not the AFL :lol: ) the programs are more comparable. However the NRLs telecast is still shorter than the AFLs game section meaning they are still falsly advantaged :wink:

so..... you were arguing that the longer broadcast is an advantage for the VFL
now
you're arguing its a disadvantage

8-[
:-k
:lol: :lol: :lol:
RL SOO II 4.194 Million veiwers
RL SOO I 4.068 Million
NRL GF 3.968 Million
VFL Grand Final 3.620 Million
SOO III 3.364 Million
NRL Prelim 2.219 Million
Kangaroos V NZ 1.214 Million

Sookerwhos V Japan 238K :lol:
User avatar
Xman
Coach
Coach
Reactions:
Posts: 13919
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 7:09 pm
Team: Essendon
Location:

Re: Fight Club - Football TV Ratings Thread

Post by Xman »

Raiderdave wrote:
Xman wrote:
Raiderdave wrote:

ah no
you lot boasted ............. Oh oh oh .... we always win the metro ratings
we said .... we make up for this .. & ... surpass the VFL's ratings ... when our regionals are factored in
you lot said ..... oh , well .. the regionals don't matter cos they aren't counted properly
we said.... well , we'll see when the money is dished out
you lot said .... well even if they do put you ahead for ratings ... our games go for longer ... advertisers will pay more to broadcasters .. as they can show more adds in a VFL broadcast
we said ...well , we'll see when the money is dished out


ahhhhhhhh
who was right ? :cool:
we were. We got more! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
really .... when did the NRL announce its deal had been finalised ? :-k

oh thats right .. they haven't :wink:
whats that I can smell

fear ? :cool:
NZ's regionals, or ratings etc were never discussed in this manner and therefore not compared.

Fact is the AFL is worth more to Ch7/Foxtel than the NRL is to Ch9/Foxtel. This is exactly what were were saying! :roll:
King-Eliagh: ...I believe [RL] is popular in all the other states and territories, bar tasmania.
User avatar
Xman
Coach
Coach
Reactions:
Posts: 13919
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 7:09 pm
Team: Essendon
Location:

Re: Fight Club - Football TV Ratings Thread

Post by Xman »

Raiderdave wrote:
Xman wrote:
pussycat wrote:
Cant you see xman that by making a statement like that your admitting you have a boring, long winded game that cant compete with the NRL unless it is given special treatment :lol:

That survey, regardless of what you read into it, pits the figures for the average pre match/match/post match against your match average alone. not only that, it doesn't give any consideration to the home fans base of our 16th side.


So if you want to see this as some kind of victory, no matter how patheticly shallow the survey might be. It shows just how desperate you and your cronies must be. :roll:

On top of all that AFL has more games on FTA and almost twice the games on PTV. How pathetic are they?
Every program has a peak audience and an average lower than this. EVERY program. A shorter program will always have a higher average because the averaging result will be closer to the peak audience. Why do you think networks have begun coding the programs? For fun? :roll:

The NRL have had this "false" averaging advantage for years. Now the AFL game is coded by CH 7 (not the AFL :lol: ) the programs are more comparable. However the NRLs telecast is still shorter than the AFLs game section meaning they are still falsly advantaged :wink:

so..... you were arguing that the longer broadcast is an advantage for the VFL
now
you're arguing its a disadvantage

8-[
:-k
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Its both stupid! :roll:

Ch7 do well because they get 3 hrs of great ratings. But the raw figures when this fact is not considered, favour a shorter program because of averaging. But these figures are essentailly irrelevant. The networks know the value of each product. :wink:
King-Eliagh: ...I believe [RL] is popular in all the other states and territories, bar tasmania.
pussycat
Coach
Coach
Reactions:
Posts: 6620
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 10:50 pm
Team: The Shanghai Sharks
Location: far away

Re: Fight Club - Football TV Ratings Thread

Post by pussycat »

Xman wrote:
pussycat wrote:
Xman wrote:
How, we won this year, even with a cummulative count that ignores our 50% longer running time and overlapping broadcasts.

=D> =D> =D>
Cant you see xman that by making a statement like that your admitting you have a boring, long winded game that cant compete with the NRL unless it is given special treatment :lol:

That survey, regardless of what you read into it, pits the figures for the average pre match/match/post match against your match average alone. not only that, it doesn't give any consideration to the home fans base of our 16th side.


So if you want to see this as some kind of victory, no matter how patheticly shallow the survey might be. It shows just how desperate you and your cronies must be. :roll:

On top of all that AFL has more games on FTA and almost twice the games on PTV. How pathetic are they?
Every program has a peak audience and an average lower than this. EVERY program. A shorter program will always have a higher average because the averaging result will be closer to the peak audience. Why do you think networks have begun coding the programs? For fun? :roll:

The NRL have had this "false" averaging advantage for years. Now the AFL game is coded by CH 7 (not the AFL :lol: ) the programs are more comparable. However the NRLs telecast is still shorter than the AFLs game section meaning they are still falsly advantaged :wink:
Some do it (the majority including the NRL don't) and they do it so they can say 'mine is bigger than yours. Even though the AFL's is actually puny- and shrivels up a little more each year :lol:

Whats false about The NRL averages? There program is worked out from go to woa. The AFL, on the other don't, they just average out the highest rating part - the actual match itself . Forget the first 15minutes were people don't even bother to turn there sets on, Gus's 'high' rating soliloquey and Stero's post match wrap up - How pathetic! Its like trying to compare the Parra Olympics with the Olympics.


What it Means, XMan. Is that the AFL game by its very is dull, boring and drawn out nature, it just drags on and on , failing to capture anyone's attention for any length of time. So Stokes is falsely inflating the rating of the AFL to try and recoup some of his money by showing poor innocent potential advertisers ratings figures, for a particular time slot, that are fudged. And dopes, like the guy at the 'Australian' who wrote that article, are just as taken in. Meaning the D will be pumping out his chest out aswell.
Rugby League, the dominant force in Australian sport! :cheers:

"I do like annoying the Victorians; they are so easy to get, At times I've looked at them and had a giggle." Peter V'Landys
Stewie
Coach
Coach
Reactions:
Posts: 2771
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:03 pm
Team: Port Adelaide Football Club
Location:

Re: Fight Club - Football TV Ratings Thread

Post by Stewie »

Doesn't the nRL start at 7.35 and when it finishes they almost instantly cut to the next game which is from kick off and without the intro?

The nRL could code it, but would it be worth it for 5 minutes? Clutching at straws Puss.
Raiderdave wrote:

7K is a tremendous turnout
Image
piesman2011
Coach
Coach
Reactions:
Posts: 2306
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 9:52 am
Team: Collingwood
Location:

Re: Fight Club - Football TV Ratings Thread

Post by piesman2011 »

Im curious does the AFLs 123 million viewer figure include the preseason cup?
Last edited by piesman2011 on Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Locked